Jump to content

Recommended Posts

These people are pretty harmless though. To put it in perspective, I?ve seen some truly horrendous things done in Africa because of superstition or ?traditional religion?. This type of thing has at least been distilled out of Christianity over the millennia. The worst they?re going to do is tell you that you are going to hell, not actually send you there at the behest of some ju-ju peddler.

I'll stand next to you on the 17:19 tonight loudly proclaiming the urgent need for us all to partake in donkey (or donkeyess) buggery lest our immortal donkey buggering souls be damned shall I?

That'll be fun for everyone, or perhaps I'm not a selfish arsehole who actually has consideration for my fellow man (or woman).

Brendan, may I refer you to Piers's post as to why it's not harmless fun....


....anti-social behaviour almost by definition is harmless. No one gets physically (or even mentally) hurt but it's still bloody rude and well, not cricket is it? And uninvited religious preaching to a captive audience in a confined space seems pretty anti-social to me.


Edit: the one above his last one.

Preaching on a bus, so they can intimidate innocent people - who cannot escape - with their absurd views... that's pretty low in my book!


I'd much rather be the middle class white male tutting away, than a raving lunatic shouting at normal people on a bus, and generally making everyone's journey unpleasant.


Actually, I'd rather be on the train instead.

SeanMG - this site has some info on bloodless surgery.


I thought they must be nuts to refuse blood in surgery but after seeing some of the evidence (not neccessarily on the site I posted) it turned out that other fluid replacement and methods of boosting and conserving your own blood are actually safer and lead to shorter recovery times too. Even tho I don't agree that blood should be refused on a biblical basis, i would say I was a JW just to get the better option of bloodless surgery.

And what the hell is wrong with the middle class tut, which obviously is a nasty laughable affectation of the effete, unlike the laudable down to earth tut of the salt of the earth working class...and how the feck did THIS become about class.?!?!?!..Keef, you have much to answer for, were you flaming perchance?

I had an interesting chat with three of them whilst waiting for the bus at the Elephant one day. I stood nearby lamenting the tag team evangelical ear bashing they were dishing out. I made it clear I was unimpressed, I mean, I don't stand about shouting at them that they need stuff I'm into, so I thought I'd mock them. Gently.


I got bored and my ears were hurting so I moved away, just a few metres towards my stop.


Then three 16 year old god fearing morons decided that I needed to hear the word. I supose that my behaviour probably showed me up to be crying out for salvation. Anyhow, their line of attack went a bit like "you're a fool if you don't believe in god". I pointed out that they were in no way able to judge fairly if I was a fool having never met me before. This elicited the same response, "you need god, he's there for you" etc. They weren't listening which, in that situation, was my job.


I got on the 176 wishing that they were right, that hell does exist, but that it is where they're headed for being such drab pains in the arse.


ap

On a kind of related note I can't wait for the election, maybe sooner than we think as the government realises the economy is up the creek for years to come, when, for the first time since 1997, we are likely to see some Labour canvassers on our doorstep. I'm preparing my 3 questions already...one based on weapons of mass destruction, one on No more boom and bust and one wild card.......
and how the feck did THIS become about class.?!?!?!..Keef, you have much to answer for, were you flaming perchance?


I don't believe in class, I've stated that loads of times ;-)


And then look at the things you call Gillian McKeith - who are you or anyone to say she is nuts for example? I might well be wrong about beliefs out of thin air, but I'm consistent...


Now hang on. I never said she was nuts! I just said she was a nasty cnut, and I stand by that!


RE: The people on the bus thing, I honestly don't see it as a problem like you guys do, and would much rather that on a public bus than answer my door, of my home to a stranger who wants to preach to me.


Train, different thing altogether, rules out the window, everything on a train is anti social in my opinio.


I encountered a bus 'preacher' on the day after the London bombs asking if we were prepared to meet our maker, that she was prepared to meet her maker. People were genuinely terrified by her, what gives her the right, her god given righteousness presumably, because of course she is doing the right thing in the eyes of her evangelical god, so it can't be wrong can it.


Believe you me she very nearly met her maker there and then ?$*(%&"$(%$ Bitch!!


Well out of line Keef. Though in all fairness some kids with phone speakers have been dangerously close to their makers too!!



Not sure if you mean for mentioning bus preachers (which the rest of the post was about), or saying that Sean's attitude made me want to punch him on the nose (which I'd already apologised for and edited)?


And why can we disagree about lots of things but it's only religion that makes you want to punch me on the nose?


We disagree about things and debate our respective sides. When it comes to religion, I just find your tone gets a bit smug, maybe I'm wrong, but is just how I read it, and it has gotten my back up in the past, so I guess I may be reading in to things things that are not there...

jumpinjackflash Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> At least they were '3 God fearing 16 year old

> morons' and not three mindless hooded thugs who

> tried to mug you. I know who I'd rather be

> standing at the bus stop with.


That is true, but given the choice I'd rather be standing next to 3 NORMAL kids.


And there's not necessarily a correlation between a religious upbringing and juvenile thuggery. In fact, two of the biggest thugs when I was at school were from a strict religious family! It's up to parents to teach their children what's right and wrong, and more importantly to teach them how to decide for themselves what is right and wrong, through experience, observation and empathy. Not to take a dubious ancient text as some sort of twisted moral guide.


Sorry, going off on a tangent again...

OH GOD


What did I start with this discussion ???


However on the Preaching at Bus stops bit, about 9 years ago at the Elephant waiting for a no 12 home there were the Gospal Singers all there singing and a dancing and a preaching and at the end they gave the Microphone to the Italian with a speech impediment who proclaimed at the top of his voice


"The wages of sin is deaf"


Pith the deaf people is all I say !!!

The values put forward in the New Testament (well, the Gospels) are a pretty good basis for ethical behaviour, in my opinion. Most of the Old Testament is pretty frightening reading, hard to live by and you'd wonder why you'd want to.


As for the preaching on buses... I'm a bit torn. I can see why if you genuinely believe that a person can only have their soul saved by becoming a Christian (or whatever your religious flavour is) then you have a very strong moral imperative to preach. Christians are basically supposed to be evangelical for that reason, although it makes me a bit uncomfortable. For me, it's about manners and intelligence. If someone stood up on a bus and was charming and articulate, then it would make my ride more interesting. I can see that it would annoy other people, though.


There's absolutely no excuse for haranguing, lecturing, patronising, threatening, or tediously droning on for Jesus. And anyone who disagrees with me will get a jolly good smack and a finger-wagging, so there.

david_carnell Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Unsurprisingly I'm with Sean on this one.

>

> I couldn't give two hoots who believes what as

> long as it doesn't intefere with my life or cause

> ill towards others.


Unfortunately in the case of Jehovah's Witnesses it does cause ill to others - they would rather refuse a blood transfusion for their sick child than let them have a life saving transfusion. I'm all for adults to make that choice for themselves if they really want to (although if they have dependants I would be less supportive) but to make that choice on behalf of your child makes my blood boil.


I used to live next door to a Jehovah's Witness family, and they were very nice people and we got on well despite our religious differences (I was raised Catholic, though no churchgoer these days), but I really didn't like that aspect of their belief.


Particularly because I asked some who knocked on our door them to show me the evidence from the bible for the belief, and the passages they showed me were clearly all about eating kosher meat, not blood transfusions. They'd just read it too literally.


Couldn't fault them for dedication to their beliefs though. And always polite when they came calling, despite the fact as a teenager I used to quite enjoy teasing them about their beliefs - e.g. the 144,000 thing - you know, asking how they would feel if they happened to be the 144,001st person to qualify for heaven and end up getting stuck down here with us because they'd run out of space.

> Is anyone else getting annoyed and what techniques

> (apart from the polite no thank you and shutting

> the door) do you use ?


Make eye contact, WIDE eye contact.

Interrupt their first sentence and inform them that although this is SE22 not every f@cker in the postal district is prepared to give the slightest amount of heed to their bollocksing horseshit.

Give a wave of your hand to indicate they should depart hither and yon.


Still on your doorstep?

Throw in a 'cocksucker'.

Should do it.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • “There was an excellent discussion on Newscast last night between the BBC Political Editor, the director of the IFS and the director of More In Common - all highly intelligent people with no party political agenda ” I would call this “generous”   Labour should never have made that tax promise because, as with - duh - Brexit, it’s pretending the real world doesn’t exist now. I blame Labour in no small part for this delusion. But the electorate need to cop on as well.  They think they can have everything they want without responsibilities, costs or attachments. The media encourage this  Labour do need to raise taxes. The country needs it.  Now, exactly how it’s done remains to be seen. But if people are just going to go around going “la la laffer curve. Liars! String em up! Vote someone else” then they just aren’t serious people reckoning with the problem yes Labour are more than a year into their term, but after 14 years of what the Tories  did? Whoever takes over, has a major problem 
    • Messaging, messaging, messaging. That's all it boils down to. There are only so many fiscal policies out there, and they're there for the taking, no matter which party you're in. I hate to say it, but Farage gets it right every time. Even when Reform reneges on fiscal policy, it does it with enough confidence and candidness that no one is wringing their hands. Instead, they're quietly admired for their pragmatism. Strangely, it's exactly the same as Labour has done, with its manifesto reverse on income tax, but it's going to bomb.  Blaming the Tories / Brexit / Covid / Putin ... none of it washes with the public anymore  - it wants to be sold a vision of the future, not reminded of the disasters of the past. Labour put itself on the back foot with its 'the tories fucked it all up' stance right at the beginning of its tenure.  All Lammy had to do (as with Reeves and Raynor etc) was say 'mea culpa. We've made a mistake, we'll fix it. Sorry guys, we're on it'. But instead it's 'nothing to see here / it's someone else's fault / I was buying a suit / hadn't been briefed yet'.  And, of course, the press smells blood, which never helps.  Oh! And Reeve's speech on Wednesday was so drab and predictable that even the journalists at the press conference couldn't really be arsed to come up with any challenging questions. 
    • Niko 07818 607 583 has been doing jobs for us for several years, he is reliable, always there for us, highly recommended! 
    • I am keeping my fingers crossed the next few days are not so loud. I honestly think it is the private, back garden displays that are most problematic as, in general, there is no way of knowing when and where they might happen. For those letting off a few bangers in the garden I get it is tempting to think what's the harm in a few minutes of 'fun', but it is the absolute randomness of sudden bangs that can do irreparable damage to people and animals. With organised events that are well advertised there is some forewarning at least, and the hope is that organisers of such events can be persuaded to adopt and make a virtue of using only low noise displays in future.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...